Older adults recover more marginal knowledge and use feedback more effectively than younger adults: evidence using "I don't know" vs. "I don't remember" for general knowledge questions.

Through three experiments, we examined older and younger adults' metacognitive ability to distinguish between what is not stored in the knowledge base versus merely inaccessible. Difficult materials were selected to test this ability when retrieval failures were very frequent. Of particular interest was the influence of feedback (and lack thereof) in potential new learning and recovery of marginal knowledge across age groups. Participants answered short-answer general knowledge questions, responding "I do not know" (DK) or "I do not remember" (DR) when retrieval failed. After DKs, performance on a subsequent multiple-choice (Exp. 1) and short-answer test following correct-answer feedback (Exp. 2) was lower than after DRs, supporting self-reported not remembering reflects failures of accessibility whereas not knowing captures a lack of availability. Yet, older adults showed a tendency to answer more DK questions correctly on the final tests than younger adults. Experiment 3 was a replication and extension of Experiment 2 including two groups of online participants in which one group was not provided correct answer feedback during the initial short-answer test. This allowed us to examine the degree to which any new learning and recovery of access to marginal knowledge was occurring across the age groups. Together, the findings indicate that (1) metacognitive awareness regarding underlying causes of retrieval failures is maintained across different distributions of knowledge accessibility, (2) older adults use correct answer feedback more effectively than younger adults, and (3) in the absence of feedback, older adults spontaneously recover marginal knowledge.

"Take a walk in someone else's shoes": the role of participatory arts for health research development and training.

Participatory arts are increasingly recognised as a valuable and accessible mechanism for giving a voice to the experiences of individuals' health and healthcare. In recent years, there has been a move towards embedding participatory arts-based models into public engagement processes. Here, we contribute to the existing literature on the use of participatory arts-based approaches and their role in health research and healthcare practise, focusing on two interlinked approaches, the creation of personas and storytelling. We draw on two recent projects which have utilised these approaches to inform subsequent healthcare research and as a professional training tool to improve patient experience in a healthcare setting. We add to emerging literature to outline the benefits of these approaches in supporting research and training in healthcare settings, with a focus towards the co-produced foundations of these approaches. We demonstrate how such approaches can be utilised to capture different forms of voices, experiences and perspectives to help inform healthcare research and training, rooted in the lived experience of individuals who are directly involved in the creative process of developing personas via storytelling. These approaches challenge the listener to "walk in someone else's shoes", using their own homes and lives as a theatrical set in which to envisage someone else's story, involving the listener in the creative process through (re)imagining the stories and experiences of the characters. Greater use of immersive, co-produced participatory art-based approaches should be used in PPIE to inform research and training in healthcare settings as a means of centring those with lived experience through co-production. Involving those with lived experience, particularly from groups who are traditionally excluded from research, via a process which is based on co-creation and co-production, reorientates the researcher-participant dynamic to fully centre those involved in the research at the heart of the tools used to guide health and healthcare research. In this way, it may also aid in trust and relationship building between institutions and communities in a way which is focused around positive, creative methods to aid health research and healthcare processes. Such approaches may help to break down barriers between academic institutions, healthcare sites and communities.

This article describes how storytelling and the creation of personas, as two forms of participatory arts-based approaches, may be used to inform health research and healthcare practise, including training of healthcare professionals. We draw on two recent projects which have been created with members of diverse local communities, detailing how creative methods can be used in this way. This model of creating art with communities and people with lived experience of health conditions enables ownership of these processes and encourages participants and users to 'take a walk in someone else's shoes'. We suggest that using such approaches helps to further break down barriers between academic institutions, healthcare sites and communities and may boost trust between different stakeholders. Greater use of immersive, co-created participatory arts-based approaches can be used to inform research and training in healthcare settings as a means of centring those with lived experience through co-production. Involving those with lived experience, particularly from groups who are traditionally excluded from research, helps to shift power dynamics, and, in this way, may aid in trust and relationship building between institutions and communities in a way that encourages empathy generated from creative methods to aid health research and healthcare processes.

What influences students' abilities to critically evaluate scientific investigations?

Critical thinking is the process by which people make decisions about what to trust and what to do. Many undergraduate courses, such as those in biology and physics, include critical thinking as an important learning goal. Assessing critical thinking, however, is non-trivial, with mixed recommendations for how to assess critical thinking as part of instruction. Here we evaluate the efficacy of assessment questions to probe students' critical thinking skills in the context of biology and physics. We use two research-based standardized critical thinking instruments known as the Biology Lab Inventory of Critical Thinking in Ecology (Eco-BLIC) and Physics Lab Inventory of Critical Thinking (PLIC). These instruments provide experimental scenarios and pose questions asking students to evaluate what to trust and what to do regarding the quality of experimental designs and data. Using more than 3000 student responses from over 20 institutions, we sought to understand what features of the assessment questions elicit student critical thinking. Specifically, we investigated (a) how students critically evaluate aspects of research studies in biology and physics when they are individually evaluating one study at a time versus comparing and contrasting two and (b) whether individual evaluation questions are needed to encourage students to engage in critical thinking when comparing and contrasting. We found that students are more critical when making comparisons between two studies than when evaluating each study individually. Also, compare-and-contrast questions are sufficient for eliciting critical thinking, with students providing similar answers regardless of if the individual evaluation questions are included. This research offers new insight on the types of assessment questions that elicit critical thinking at the introductory undergraduate level; specifically, we recommend instructors incorporate more compare-and-contrast questions related to experimental design in their courses and assessments.

Integration of thought and action continued: Scale errors and categorization in toddlers.

To further explore the effect of weighted arms on toddler's performance in problem solving (Arterberry et al., 2018, Infancy, 23(2), 173), the present study explored scale errors and categorization, two instances where infants appear to show more advanced knowledge than toddlers. Experiment 1 (N = 67) used a novel task for inducing scale errors among 24- to 29-month-olds. Results replicated rates of scale errors found in previous research that used different tasks. Experiment 2 used sequential touching (N = 31) and sorting measures (N = 23) to test categorization in 24-month-old children. In both measures, children showed categorization at the basic level when there was high contrast between the exemplars, but not at a basic level with low contrast or a subordinate level. In Experiments 1 and 2, half the participants were tested while wearing weighted wristbands. Weighting the arms did not affect error rates, in contrast to previous research showing that weights improved performance in search tasks. The findings are discussed in light of children's difficulty in integrating perception, cognition, and action.

Tools for Change: Measuring Student Conceptual Understanding Across Undergraduate Biology Programs Using Bio-MAPS Assessments.

Assessing learning across a biology major can help departments monitor achievement of broader program-level goals and identify opportunities for curricular improvement. However, biology departments have lacked suitable tools to measure learning at the program scale. To address this need, we developed four freely available assessments-called Biology-Measuring Achievement and Progression in Science or Bio-MAPS-for general biology, molecular biology, ecology/evolution, and physiology programs. When administered at multiple time points in a curriculum, these instruments can provide departments with information on how student conceptual understanding changes across a major and help guide curricular modifications to enhance learning.

Defining the diverse spectrum of inversions, complex structural variation, and chromothripsis in the morbid human genome.

BACKGROUND: Structural variation (SV) influences genome organization and contributes to human disease. However, the complete mutational spectrum of SV has not been routinely captured in disease association studies. RESULTS: We sequenced 689 participants with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental abnormalities to construct a genome-wide map of large SV. Using long-insert jumping libraries at 105X mean physical coverage and linked-read whole-genome sequencing from 10X Genomics, we document seven major SV classes at ~5 kb SV resolution. Our results encompass 11,735 distinct large SV sites, 38.1% of which are novel and 16.8% of which are balanced or complex. We characterize 16 recurrent subclasses of complex SV (cxSV), revealing that: (1) cxSV are larger and rarer than canonical SV; (2) each genome harbors 14 large cxSV on average; (3) 84.4% of large cxSVs involve inversion; and (4) most large cxSV (93.8%) have not been delineated in previous studies. Rare SVs are more likely to disrupt coding and regulatory non-coding loci, particularly when truncating constrained and disease-associated genes. We also identify multiple cases of catastrophic chromosomal rearrangements known as chromoanagenesis, including somatic chromoanasynthesis, and extreme balanced germline chromothripsis events involving up to 65 breakpoints and 60.6 Mb across four chromosomes, further defining rare categories of extreme cxSV. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a foundational map of large SV in the morbid human genome and demonstrate a previously underappreciated abundance and diversity of cxSV that should be considered in genomic studies of human disease.